mattinoz

Spudster said:

No company should be held responsible for what users do with their product. Why should internet companies be any different? Can a phone company be held liable for callers using their service for terror plots? Or vehicle manufacturers when their vehicle is used to plow into a crowd of people? Or gun manufacturers being held liable for murders committed with their guns? Or course not and it should be the same for rules for all companies.

Rayz2016 said:

I feel there is a solution to this, and it might lie in a collaboration between Apple and Google. 

larryjw said:

AppleZulu said:

tedz98 said:

I love to see tech giants in a battle. Apple is trying to monetize privacy. Facebook is monetizing its users. Apple revenue comes from its customers. Facebook revenue comes from advertisers. You pay for free services with your data. At least now you will have the chance to decide if that is what you really want to do. By now Facebook and Google know a lot about their users. Though that data will get stale over time. I wonder how many Facebook users would actually pay for an ad-free subscription?

Apple monetizes the sale of devices by coupling them with software and services that are all designed simultaneously to function together. This is Apple's business model, and it's surprising how many people (including some regulars here) don't see that. Some of the software and services are included in the price of the device (e.g., free OS updates, productivity and music recording software, some news and music), and some are available to hardware purchasers at an additional price. Customer privacy is a value built into all three legs of the stool described above. Because the customers who buy Apple devices are the entire focus of that business model, the idea of creating a side business of collecting and selling customer data isn't just unnecessary, it would actually undermine the central business model. 

Facebook and Google traffic in data, and their paying customer is advertisers. They both sell some hardware, but the hardware's purpose is to drive users toward data collection software. Therein lies the problem with something like an ad-free subscription option for Facebook. The trust is already been sold to the highest bidder. There probably aren't many people who would simultaneously be interested in a subscription-based, ad-free social media site that ostensibly would collect and sell the subscriber's data, and who would also trust facebook to honestly deliver that service. How could they, really?

"Apple monetizes the sale of devices .... "

Of course and that's exactly what I am buying. Nothing more or less. That's why I've been buying apple products. I really do see that, and I am able to willing to pay that premium, such as it is, for that. 

lkrupp said:

Oh, and for all you cancel culture warriors here, make sure you stop using internet browsers. Remember, you canceled Brendan Eich, the creator of Javascript because he dared support traditional marriage. At the very least you should disable Javascript to make your internet experience more pure. And whatever you do don’t user Firefox. Eich was a founder of Mozilla don’t you know. And the Brave browser so many of you celebrate, Eich is the CEO. So that browser is out too I guess. What browsers do you have left to use?